UMASS/AMHERST 


312066  0344  2738  0 


iJ 


?-*^\ 


A^^'^it 


LIBRARY 


OF  THE 


MASSACHUSETTS 

AGRICULTURAL 

COLLEGE 

No.2^i_5^_ci_Q__  Date 

s  o  u  R  c  E .  AI^  w . .  Jj2ja.A>isu>Cnva_ , 


P4 


This  book  may  be  kept  out 

TWO     WEEKS 

only,  and  is  subject  to  a  fine  of  TWO 
CENTS  a  day  thereafter.  It  will  be  due  on 
the  day  indicated  below. 


^iJ/V 


b^j3 


m 


4 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Boston  Library  Consortium  IVIember  Libraries 


http://www.archive.org/details/ourmilitaryfeverOOpear 


''OUR    MILITARY   FEVER 


D.  C.  PEARSON 

CAPTAIN    SECOND    CAVALRY 
UNITED    STATES    ARMY 


1895 


T5/ 

the  new  york  printing  co. 

(the  republic  press) 

14  lafayette  place,  n.  y. 


''OUR  MILITARY  FEVER." 

The  following  was  published  in  October,  1894,  by  one  of  the 
most  able  and  influential  journals  in  New  England: 


"  OUR  MILITARY  FEVER. 
"  To  the  Editor  of  the  Transcript :  It  is  not  a  pleasant  task  to 
protest  against  public  opinion;  neither  is  it  easy  to  elbow  your 
way  through  a  crowd  going  in  the  opposite  direction.  Nothing 
but  a  sense  of  duty,  therefore,  can  compel  me  to  raise  my  voice 
against  the  growing  military  fever  of  the  American  people. 
Let  me  confess  at  once  to  a  deep  interest  in  military  matters. 
In  my  travels,  I  have  become  familiar  with  the  armies  of  Ger- 
many, France,  Italy,  Austria,  and  especially  of  Switzerland, 
Everywhere  the  tread  of  soldiery,  the  drums,  the  crack  of  mus- 
ketry have  attracted  me.  It  has  been  part  of  my  work  in  his- 
torical research,  to  visit  and  examine  battlefields,  to  learn 
something  about  tactics  and  strategy.  At  one  time,  I  imagined 
that  a  great  military  establishment  was  just  what  was  needed  in 
the  United  States  to  weld  public  spirit  into  a  more  vigorous 
form,  to  divert  the  attention  of  our  men  from  the  present  all 
devouring  commercialism,  and  to  give  our  male  population  a 
much  needed  set-up.  That  is  what  I  thought  until  I  began  to 
study  social  and  economic  questions,  and  to  realize  that  mili- 
tarism is  a  part  of  the  old  order  of  things  which  the  world  is 
outgrowing.  Whatever  the  glories  of  its  past  may  be,  the  reg- 
ular army  of  the  United  States  is  to-day  an  antiquated  sur- 
vival— as  out  of  place  in  this  progressive  nation  of  sixty-five 
millions  as  would  be  a  coat  of  mail  upon  a  modern  battlefield, 
or  a  wooden  ship  in  the  next  naval  encounter.  No  army  of 
mercenaries  deserves  popular  support;  and  in  truth,  even  to 
raise  the  relatively  insignificant  force  of  twenty-six  thousand 
men,  great  difficulty  is  experienced.  About  one-third  of  the 
accepted  recruits  are  foreigners,  and  not  a  few  illiterate. 
Almost  ten  per  cent,  of  the  army  deserts  each  year.  Courts- 
martial  are  alarmingly  frequent  and  our  military  prisons  are 
kept  well  filled.  The  regular  army  is  as  much  a  last  resort  for 
American-born  men,  as  domestic  service  is  for  women.     Noth- 


but  the  pressure  of  hard  times  can  ever  fill  the  one  or  the  other 
with  good  material.  Furthermore,  the  process  by  which  the 
majority  of  officers  is  obtained  for  this  force  creates  a  distinct 
hierarchical  caste  which  is  incongruous  with  a  true  democracy. 
And  in  order  to  maintain  this  force  of  Federal  policemen,  the 
people  of  the  United  States  spend  on  an  average  over  forty- 
eight  millions  of  dollars  a  year,  making  an  annual  cost  per  man 
nearly  five  times  as  great  as  Germany  with  her  magnificent 
army.  Now  a  demand  is  heard  from  headquarters  for  an  addi- 
tion to  the  regular  army.  Upon  what  plea  ?  Partly  on  account 
of  the  danger  of  foreign  invasion,  but  principally  to  quell  popu- 
lar movements.  The  first  danger  may  be  dismissed  without  a 
moment's  consideration.  A  new  era  is  even  now  dawning  upon 
civilized  communities,  in  which  mere  international  questions 
will  be  completely  over-shadowed  by  the  great  social  and  econ- 
omic questions.  Diplomacy,  which  has  played  at  chess  too  long 
with  the  nations,  will  soon  become  a  lost  art.  The  last  mon- 
archs  who  may  still  have  power  to  produce  war,  will  fall  from 
their  genealogical  trees  like  over-ripe  apples.  It  ought  to  be 
our  glory  not  to  be  prepared  to  make  war  upon  our  neighbors, 
or  even  to  repel  an  attack  from  the  outside,  but  to  settle  any 
and  every  foreign  dispute  by  peaceful  means,  and  arbitration  if 
need  be.  *  «  *  * 

(Signed)  W.    D.   McCrackan." 


In  his  "History  of  Civilization  in  England,"  Buckle  says:  "In 
"  our  time  we  frequently  meet  with  men  whose  erudition  ministers 
"  to  their  ignorance,  and  who,  the  more  they  read,  the  less  they 
"  know." 

And  Locke,  in  his  "Essay  on  Human  Understanding,"  has 
noticed  this  "learned  ignorance  for  which  many  men  are  remark- 
able." 

We  do  not  propose  to  look  any  further  to  discover  to  what  sort 
or  class  of  readers  and  writers  our  critic  belongs.  After  read- 
ing the  foregoing  specimen  of  "learned  ignorance,"  one  is  at  loss 
to  decide  if  it  be  worthy  of  consideration.  But,  thinking  of  the 
great  probability  of  its  acceptance  as  sound  doctrine  by  many  in- 
telligent readers,  under  the  circumstances  of  its  publication,  and 
in  view  of  the  bonds  we  are  under  to  deliver  an  essay,  we  address 
ourselves  to  the  subject  of  our  Military  Fever,  so-called. 


If  Mr.  McCrackan  were  writing  under  the  spur  of  the  neces- 
sity of  earning  his  daily  bread,  or  under  any  such  pressure  as 
would  be  commensurate  with  War  Department  orders  compelling 
him  to  write  an  essay,  we  find  him  "Guilty,  with  a  recommenda- 
tion to  mercy."  But  if,  as  the  major  part  of  the  evidence  shows, 
he  has  desired  to  exploit  himself  at  the  expense  of  the  United 
States  Army,  we  convict  him,  and  there  is  no  mercy  for  him ! 

Let  us  look  at  the  dummies  composing  the  battery  which  he 
has  trained  upon  us. 

**  The  United  States  Army  is  an  antiquated  survival." 
"  The  United  States  Army  is  a  body  of  mercenaries." 
"  The  United  States  Army  is  raised  with  great  difficulty." 
"  One-third  of  the  United  States  Army  are  foreigners." 
"  The  United  States  Army  contains  not  a  few  illiterate." 
"  Nearly  ten  per  cent,  of  the  Army  deserts  yearly." 
"  The  frequency  of  courts-martial  is  alarming." 
"  The  regular  army  is  a  last  resort." 
"  Officers  form  a  hierarchical  caste." 
"  The  United  States   Army  costs  the  people   forty-eight 

millions  a  year." 
"  The  United  States  ought  not  to  be  prepared  to  repel  an 
attack  from  the  outside." 
Consider  first,  as  he  says,  that  the  United  States  army  is  as 
much  out  of  place  in  this  progressive  nation  of  sixty-five  millions, 
as  would  be  a  coat  of  mail  upon  a  modern  battlefield,  or  a  wooden 
ship  in  the  next  naval  encounter!  From  things  in  reality  an- 
tiquated, let  us  turn  attention  to  things  which  the  experience  and 
usages  of  all  time,  since  the  world  began,  have  wrought  out  for  us. 
There  is  only  one  sense  in  which,  by  a'  great  strain  of  the 
meaning  of  the  word,  the  United  States  army  can  be  said  to  be 
antiquated.  If  the  accumulated  experience  of  allages,  and  of  all 
countries,  teaches  that  a  strong  right  arm  is  indispensable  to  the 
head  that  administers  the  laws;  if  the  long-established  quality 
or  essence  of  a  thing;  entitles  it  to  be  called  antiquated,  then  may 
the  United  States  army  be  said  to  be  antiquated.  But  more  is  the 
purpose  of  this  fling  than  centers  about  the  duration  of  years. 
The  idea  of  obsoleteness  is  the  metal  in  this  particular  dummy. 
As  well  say  that  the  custom  of  drinking  when  thirsty;  of  eating 
when  hungry;  of  protecting  the  weak;  of  controlling  and  sub- 
duing the  vicious;  of  locking  treasure   vaults;  of  cladding  ships 


with  iron;  of  resisting  tiie  ferocity  of  wild  beasts;  of  staying  the 
invaders  of  all  nations  and  climes,  who  are  forever  waiting  to 
encroach  upon  the  defenceless;  as  well  say  that  the  customary 
duty  and  action  in  the  connections  mentioned  have  become  obso- 
lete, as  to  make  that  affirmation  of  the  United  States  army! 

Observe  the  elements  of  disintegration  in  Mr.  McCrackan's 
very  words.  The  army  is  as  much  out  of  place  in  this  nation  as  a 
"coat  of  mail  upon  a  modern  battlefield,"  or  a  "wooden  ship  in 
the  next  naval  encounter."  Observe  the  quite  correct  apprecia- 
tion, which,  apparently  unawares,  creeps  out  of  his  own  language 
touching  what  has  become  in  reality  obsolete,  and  touching  what 
is  not  obsolete,  and  setting  forth  the  universally  recognized  prin- 
ciples in  wars  upon  land  and  sea,  which  are  yet  to  come  and 
inevitable.  In  other  words,  wars  have  not  become  obsolete,  but 
he  will  have  it  that  the  means  of  conducting  them  are  no  longer 
necessary.  There  are  battlefields  and  naval  encounters  just 
beyond  the  veil  of  to-morrow;  but  no  regular  army  is  required! 
Did  he  ever  contemplate  what  this  progressive  nation  of  sixty-five 
millions  would  have  been,  or  would  become,  in  the  absence  of  the 
army  he  abuses!  Imagination  can  hardly  picture  the  decay,  the 
shame  which  this  nation  would  without  doubt  be  offering  to  tj^ 
jnMHiHSii^^he  gaze  of  mankind !  After  becoming  tributary  to  some 
other  nation,  the  American  people  would  be  whipped  and  scruffed 
from  the  face  of  the  earth,  obliterated  as  a  people,  and  succeeded 
by  a  people  more  worthy  to  occupy  the  land !  Our  adversary,  while 
gazing  eastwardly  upon  Switzerland,  seems  to  have  been  wilfully 
oblivious  to  the  westward  trend  of  population,  commerce  and 
wealth,  within  our  own  boundaries,  and  all  those  things  which 
redound  to  a  nation's  glory,  and  which  have  most  indubitably 
depended  upon,  and  had  their  creating  force  in,  the  United  States 
army ! 

The  United  States  Army — which  he  styles  a  body  of  mer- 
cenaries! Where  can  the  man,  or  body  of  men,  be  found,  out- 
side of  the  lunatic,  pauper,  prisoner  and  barbarian  classes,  who 
does  not  work  for  pay  ?  What  civilized  beings  are  there  who  lie 
down  upon  soft  couches,  and,  looking  up  to  heaven,  have  food  and 
drink  drop  from  nowhere  into  their  mouths,  and  raiment,  to  fit 
and  to  please,  automatically  come  and  clothe  their  bodies?  And 
what  people  of  equal  intelligence  and  capacity,  give  their  lives 
and  their  services  for  more  moderate  rewards  than  soldiers  of  the 


United  States  Army?  There  are  laws  in  this  world  from  which 
there  is  no  escape.  One  of  these  laws  is  that  you  shall  not  have 
a  thing  of  value  from  your  fellow-men  for  nothing.  It  is  fair 
exchange  that  is  no  robbery.  The  benefits  of  peace  and  good 
order,  the  security  of  life  and  family  and  property,  the  unhindered 
pursuit  of  liberty  and  happiness,  are  worth  more  than  can  be 
expressed  by  the  enumeration  of  dollars  and  cents.  While  the 
easily  calculated  cost  for  rations,  pay,  clothing,  transportation 
and  shelter  of  the  United  States  soldiers  is  not  only  a  tax  of  less 
than  fifty  cents  a  year  (less  than  a  nickle  a  month)  to  each  Ameri- 
can citizen — and  even  that  finds  its  way,  in  the  main,  back  to  the 
country's  coffers  and  channels  of  trade — are  the  soldiers  of  the 
United  States  Army  mercenaries?  So  is  the  lawyer;  so  is  the 
schoolmaster;  so  is  the  clergyman;  so  is  the  merchant;  so  is  the 
legislator;  so  is  the  literary  man! 

There  is  truth  in  the  statement  that  the  United  States  Army 
is  raised  with  difficulty;  but  the  truth  is  not  on  the  side  of  the 
McCrackan  argument.  What  is  the  difficulty?  Not  in  the  num- 
ber applying  for  admission.  I  have  the  facts  for  the  statement 
that  for  250  men  accepted  into  the  Army,  in  a  period  of  twenty- 
five  months,  nearly  3,000  made  application.  But  twelve  men  out 
of  every  hundred  making  known  their  desire  to  enter,  under  the 
rigid  rules  of  the  recruiting  service,  came  up  to  the  mental,  moral 
and  physical  requirements.  The  United  States  Army  is  getting 
the  cream  of  American  manhood;  whereas,  according  to  Mr. 
McCrackan,  it  is  getting  nothing  but  skim  milk,  and  mighty  little 
of  that.  It  may  very  naturally  happen  that  many  intelligent 
communities,  in  their  entirety,  know  very  little  of  the  stamp  of 
men  who  are  in  the  tanks  to-day;  of  the  high  average  mentality; 
of  the  physical  superiority;  of  bodies  as  nearly  without  blemish 
as  was  rigorously  demanded  of  sacrifices  to  Jehovah  in  Bible 
history;  and  of  character  and  reputation  similarly  without  blem- 
ish, as  far  as  it  be  possible  to  secure  for  any  army  upon  the  foot- 
stool. 

I  affirm  that  it  might  prove  very  astonishing  and  not  a  little 
humiliating,  for  the  majority  of  even  that  class  who  animadvert 
upon  the  United  States  Army,  to  know  that  it  would  be  impossi- 
ble for  them  to  pass  the  examination  for  admission.  There  is  a 
saying  that  nothing  worth  having  in  this  world  can  be  had  except 
by  hard  work.      Gold  is  hard  to  get.      Dirt  can  be  picked  up  any- 


8 

where.      There  is  the  definition  of  the  great  difficulty  with  which 
the  United  States  Army  is  raised. 

The  objections  that  officers  form  a  hierarchical  class,  is  another 
puerile  objection,  against  an  order  of  things  established  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world.  Principles  are  immutable.  Said  the 
Philosopher  Poet: 

Order  is  heaven's  first  law,  and,  this  confessed, 
Some  are  and  must  be,  greater  than  the  rest. 

In  the  material  world,  if  one  would  secure  the  greatest  possi- 
ble power  by  the  employment  of  the  units  from  which  the  power 
is  derived,  how  futile  to  employ  those  units  separately,  or  with  as 
many  different  directions  and  impulses  as  there  are  units.  On 
the  other  hand,  combine  and  band  such  units  together,  like  the 
cemented  parts  of  masonry,  like  the  parts  in  the  locomotive 
driver,  like  the  details  of  the  architecture  of  the  Leviathans  that 
cover  the  ocean,  and  you  see,  in  each  case,  a  grand,  resulting 
unit,  fit  for  the  accomplishment  of  great  ends. 

Again,  take  the  view  of  this  question,  as  offered  in  the  assem- 
bling of  men  outside  of  the  military,  in  the  many  occupations  of 
the  world  at  large — in  building  railroads  and  houses  and  bridges, 
in  mines  and  factories,  in  merchandising,  in  charitable  and  relig- 
ious enterprises — what  headway  or  success  could  be  made  with- 
out the  combinations  of  individuals;  and  to  what  useful  purpose 
would  such  combinations  tend,  except,  in  all  cases,  there  be  those 
whose  function  it  is  to  order,  to  direct,  to  command  ?  Has 
Mr.  McCrackan  anything  to  say  against  all  that  hierarchy  of  su- 
perintendents, master-mechanics,  captains,  chief  clerks,  engineers, 
bishops  and  deacons  ? 

Mistaken  conclusions  always  and  inevitably  result  from  ex- 
clusively contemplating  one  feature,  or  one  side,  or  one  aspect  of 
a  composite  thing.  Government  is  a  composite  thing.  Black- 
stone  says  that  "the  three  grand  requisites,  of  goodness,  of  wis- 
"  dom,  and  of  power  ought  to  be  found  in  every  well  constituted 
"  frame  of  government."  Now,  it  is  plain  that  our  adversary  of 
the  quill  has  been  gazing  too  exclusively,  and  with  blurred  vision, 
at  one  element  of  the  power  of  the  United  States.  Would  he  be- 
hold it  in  its  true  relationship  and  importance,  let  him  stand  back 
a  little  and  take  a  new  point  of  view,  and  turn  the  subject  of  the 
power  of  our  government  over  in  all  of  its  aspects.  At  the 
foundation  of  all,  there  must  be  laws;  the  laws  will  not  always 


enforce  themselves.  Two  instrumentalities  are  provided,  the 
civil  and  the  military,  in  that  order  of  precedence.  Erase  the 
military,  and  what  do  you  do  ?  You  have  taken  the  feet  and 
limbs  away  which  support  the  head  and  trunk  of  the  body  politic, 
and  the  backbone  has  disappeared  as  well.  If  we  look  to  the  other 
requisites  of  government,  which  will  save  and  rescue:  wisdom,  or 
goodness,  or  both  ? 

Optimism  in  these  two  directions  has  few  followers.  Employ- 
ing an  old-fashioned  and  time-honored  implement  of  the  farm,  the 
three-legged  milking  stool,  as  an  illustration  of  the  specimen  of 
iconoclasm  now  under  consideration,  let  us  do  away  with  one 
of  the  three  supports,  and  behold  the  condition  of  unstable  equi- 
librium— of  maid,  milking  pail  and  milk  !  Heaven  forbid  that  the 
Goddess  of  Liberty  should  ever  find  herself  in  an  analogous  situ- 
ation ! 

And  so,  one-third  of  the  United  States  Army  are  foreigners, 
are  they  ?  And  what  objection  can  Mr.  McCrackan  or  any  other 
man  with  that  same  first  syllable  to  his  name,  consistently  offer  to 
the  foreigners  in  our  army  ?  Is  he  of  American  lineage  so 
aboriginal  as  to  justify  him  in  a  slur  at  foreign  ancestry  more  or 
less  remote?  Is  he  just  now  so  afflicted  with  Americo-mania  as 
to  close  his  mouth,  his  eyes,  his  ears,  and  to  refuse  to  inflate  his 
lungs,  were  he  all  at  once  landed  in  Paris,  London  or  Berlin  ?  In 
the  words  of  a  recent  publicist,  "All  of  us  are  so  near  the  alien 
"  line  that  prejudice  against  foreigners  is  scarcely  consistent." 
Be  it  known  that  the  foreigners  in  our  Army  form  a  most  welcome 
and  soldierly  and  valuable  integer  in  our  forces.  It  is  not  the 
slightest  reflection  in  the  world  upon  the  United  States  Army  that 
it  contains  a  goodly  number  of  those  who  have  been  subjects  of 
older  nations  than  our  own;  nations  in  which  the  art  of  war  has, 
from  time  immemorial,  been  the  business  of  the  inhabitants;  gen- 
eration after  generation  having  been  governed  and  moulded  by 
military  ideas.  The  foreigners  in  our  army  are  very  apt  to  be 
men  of  military  antecedents,  some  of  them  having  family  tra- 
ditions transmitted  from  the  days  and  by  veritable  actors  of  the 
great  campaigns,  and  under  great  commanders,  of  which  and  of 
whom  our  historians  have  to  make  mention,  and  whence  cometh 
instruction  for  the  military  student.  And  be  it  known  that  the 
foreigners  as  well  as  the  Americans  in  our  army  are  not  of  the 
skim  milk  variety.     What  officer  is  at  a  loss  to  call  to  mind  the 


brave  and  loyal  Irishman,  the  man  of  unquestioning  obedience  to 
orders  ?  or  the  reliable,  the  clean,  the  methodical  Dutchman  ? 

Touching  the  subject  of  aliens  throughout  our  land,  let  us  see 
how  it  stands.  A  bulletin  from  the  Census  Office  shows  the  fol- 
lowing: In  the  western  division,  comprising  Montana,  Wyoming, 
Colorado,  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  Utah,  Nevada,  Idaho,  Washing- 
ton, Oregon,  California,  the  aliens  make  up  almost  one  half  of 
the  population — 43.67.  In  the  North  Atlantic  division,  they 
make  47.21  of  the  total,  while  in  the  South  Atlantic,  Delaware, 
Maryland,  District  of  Columbia,  the  Virginias,  the  Carolinas, 
Georgia  and  Florida,  only  6.92,  and  in  the  South-Central,  Ken- 
tucky, Tennessee,  Alabama,  Mississipi,  Louisiana,  Oklahoma  and 
Arkansas,  7.59. 

Taking  the  entire  country,  therefore,  in  1890,  the  percentage 
of  aliens  was  33.02.  How  reasonable  that  the  United  States 
Army  should  tally  with  the  nation  at  large  in  its  proportion 
of  aliens  and  non-alieas!  With  exceptionable  accuracy  Mr. 
McCrackan  states  that  the  percentage  of  aliens  in  our  army 
is  one-third.  The  latest  census  bulletin  puts  the  Nation's 
percentage  of  aliens  almost  precisely  at  the  same  figures.  What 
nicer  adjustment  of  percentages  could  be  desired!  The  official 
figures,  however,  as  handed  into  the  United  States  Senate 
by  the  Secretary  of  War,  the  other  day,  show  that  the  per- 
centage of  aliens  in  the  United  States  Army  is  very  nearly  one- 
fourth. 

And  now,  were  a  comparison  of  the  illiterate  to  be  made, 
between  our  Nation  and  our  Army,  or  between  our  Army  and  any 
army  that  ever  marched,  is  there  anybody  so  fundamentally  igno- 
rant as  to  lift  his  voice  in  unfavorable  allusion  to  the  United 
States  Army  ?  How  this  man  has  racked  his  brains  to  trump  up 
indictments  against  us!  The  saying  that  "where  there's  a  will, 
there's  a  way"  was  never  better  illustrated,  especially  a  wrong 
way.  The  United  States  Army  has  never  claimed  to  be  literary. 
In  propriety,  of  course,  it  should  make  no  boasts  of  any  kind,  but 
simply  be  grateful  to  its  friends,  who  will  speak  for  it.  To  a  body 
of  men  whose  motto  is  "Deeds,  not  Words,"  among  whom  brave 
and  splendid  action  is  the  corollary  of  disciplined  minds  and 
bodies,  among  whom  the  verses  of  Virgil  and  Horace  cut  no  figure 
in  comparison  with  respect  for  authority  and  loyalty  to  duty — to 
such  a  body  of   men,  we  do  not  apply  the  standards  by    which 


orators,  professors  and  men  of  letters  are  judged.      Right  to  the 
point,  is  what  Macaulay  said  of  Oliver  Cromwell: 

"  Wherefore  you  speak  contemptibly  of  his  parts,  I  know  not. 
But  I  suspect  you  are  not  free  from  the  error  common  to  studi- 
ous and  speculative  men.  Because  Cromwell  was  an  ungraceful 
orator,  and  never  said,  either  in  public  or  private,  anything 
memorable,  you  will  have  it  that  he  was  of  mean  capacity.  Sure 
this  is  unjust!  Many  men  have  there  been  ignorant  of  letters, 
without  wit,  without  eloquence,  who  yet  had  the  wisdom  to 
devise,  and  the  courage  to  perform,  that  which  they  lacked 
language  to  explain.  Such  men  often,  in  troubled  times,  have 
worked  out  the  deliverance  of  nations,  and  their  own  greatness 
— not  by  logic,  not  by  rhetoric,  but  by  wariness  in  success,  by 
calmness  in  danger,  by  fierce  and  stubborn  resolution  in  all 
adversity.  The  hearts  of  men  are  their  books.  Events  are 
their  tutors.  Great  actions  are  their  eloquence." 
I  shall  now  proceed  to  consider  in  what  sort  the  Army  is  a 
"  last  resort."  Let  us  take  up  this  ill-tempered  afifiirmation,  and 
see  what  it  is  worth.  Let  us  admit  that  it  is  true,  to  a  degree, 
that  the  Army  has  been,  to  some,  a  last  resort.  Is  that,  of 
necessity,  a  grave  indictment  against  the  Army!  Is  it  to  be  re- 
gretted, on  the  score  of  private  or  public  good,  that  the  Army 
offers  an  honorable  opening  and  profession  to  men  who  have 
theretofore  been  unsuccessful  and  unfortunate  in  other  pursuits  ? 
As  before  stated,  false  impressions  are  broadcast  in  relation 
to  the  Army,  But  charge  that  not  to  the  Army!  Charge  it, 
in  the  first  place,  to  the  almost  universal  ignorance,  of  which 
men,  in  their  own  lives  and  business,  are  guilty,  touching  the 
lives  and  business  of  others  who  may  be  near  them  or  who  may 
be  remote.  Charge  it,  in  part,  to  the  conceit  and  preference  for 
the  affairs  and  the  locality  with  which  a  man  is  identified,  in  com- 
parison with  the  uncertain  and  unknown  of  another  sphere  in  life. 
Charge  a  great  deal  of  it  to  the  disinclination  of  the  average  man 
to  place  himself  for  a  term  of  years  under  the  proverbial  strictness 
and  restraint  of  a  military  life. 

Taking  his  specious  views,  one  might  go  the  whole  length 
with  Mr.  McCrackan,  in  his  doctrine  of  the  undesirability  of  the 
Army  for  a  livelihood,  by  listening  to  many  applicants,  who  come 
into  the  recruiting  office  and  say  that  their  reason  for  enlisting 
is   that  times   are   hard,   and   they  cannot  find   anything  to   do. 


But,  right  here,  let  it  be  distinctly  understood  that  such  a 
declaration  is  no  passport  to  the  Army!  Nine  times  out  of  ten, 
just  the  contrary !  The  recruiting  office  is  not  the  only  place  where 
men  of  that  description  apply  for  a  job,  when  hard  up;  and  what 
reflection  is  it  upon  the  grocers,  the  butchers,  the  bakers,  the 
tailors,  the  carpenters,  the  painters,  that  men,  unsmiled  upon  by 
fortune,  should  seek  a  job  among  their  ranks,  as  constantly 
happens  in  every  town  and  city  of  the  land  ?  Hard  times  swell 
the  number  of  the  unemployed,  of  course.  But,  taking  all 
trades  and  professions  in  view,  the  Army  is  far  down  in  the  list 
as  to  quantity  of  legitimate  candidates  for  employment.  Indeed, 
when  the  conditions  of  eligibility  for  employment  in  the  Army, 
as  to  eyes,  ears,  teeth,  mind  and  limb,  character  and  reputation, 
are  brought  to  mind,  we  are  again  making  the  comparison,  per- 
force, of  the  process  of  gold-sifting!  On  the  other  hand,  what  is 
to  be  inferred  from  applicants,  also  many,  who  go  to  the  recruit- 
ing office  to  consummate  the  ambition  of  their  lives  ?  I  have 
known  them.  I  recall  a  man  who  came  to  me  and  said:  "  My 
father  was  nine  times  wounded  and  three  times  made  prisoner, 
and  my  uncle  was  a  general  in  the  war.  I  am  old  enough  to 
enlist  now,  and  I  want  to  keep  our  name  at  the  front."  I  recall 
quite  a  multitude,  in  the  total,  who,  at  different  times,  have  come 
to  me,  saying:  "We  have  always  liked  the  Military;  we  have 
been  in  the  Militia  and  have  learned  the  drill,  and  now  we  want 
to  do  some  real  soldiering."  And,  too,  I  recall  the  disappoint- 
ment which  often  settled  upon  the  faces  of  men,  sound  and 
suitable  for  almost  any  other  avocation,  who  did  not  come  up 
to  the  requirements  of  the  examination  for  enlistment. 

Would  that  "studious  and  speculative  men,"  as  Maccaulay 
described  them,  were  more  "  studious  "  and  less  "speculative" 
when  they  write  up  the  United  States  Army  for  the  contemplation 
of  the  Public! 

The  next  dummy  we  will  touch  and  explode  is — "The  fre- 
quency of  Courts-Martial  is  alarming."  What  does  he  mean  ? 
He  says  that  Court-Martial  is  frequent.  Its  frequency  is  alarm- 
ing. The  Court-Martial  of  whom  ?  Of  officers  ?  Or  of  men  ? 
Does  he  mean  the  Court-Martial,  by  repetition,  of  individuals? 
Or  the  total  brought  to  trial?  And  who  is  to  blame — the  misbe- 
having, or  those  who  draw  up  the  charges,  or  those  convening 
the  Courts?     I  deliberately  affirm  that  the  author  of   the  state- 


13 

ment  dwells  in  Cimmerian  darkness  touching  the   various  phases 
of  the  subjects  here  alluded  to. 

It  is  conceivable  that  a  Court-Martial  would  be  more  or  less 
alarming  to  the  man  arraigned  and  tried.  It  is  also  conceivable, 
by  a  severe  exercise  of  the  imagination,  that  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  to  a  very  trifling  extent,  regard  the  Court-Mar- 
tial statistics  of  the  Army  as  indicating  a  bad  state  of  disci- 
pline and  morals,  and  so  fraught  with  danger  to  the  land.  But 
they  may  rest  their  souls  in  peace.  Let  them  come  away  from 
the  fantastical  dish  set  before  them.  Regarding  one  possible 
meaning  of  our  critic,  that  the  hierarchy  of  ofificers  are  the 
accusers,  and  the  "mercenary"  and  "illiterate"  soldiers  the 
accused,  the  former  persecuting  the  latter  with  unnecessary  sever- 
ity, this  may  perhaps  be  the  place  to  state  the  facts  in  their 
general  tenor.  What  is  true  of  one  garrison  is  very  apt  to  be  true 
of  any  other.  That  is,  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the 
occasions  of  trial  and  the  relationship  of  ofificers  and  men,  in  that 
regard,  are  pretty  much  alike  throughout  the  entire  Army. 
Therefore,  conclusions  drawn  from  the  experience  of  any  of  us, 
at  any  or  all  of  the  stations  where  we  have  served,  may  safely 
be  taken  to  characterize  and  comprehend  the  whole  subject. 
Utterly  destroying,  demolishing  and  over-turning  the  theory  that 
ofificers  habitually  persecute  and  harass  their  men,  is  the  law  of 
self-interest,  and  its  certain  operation  throughout  human  society. 
The  interest  of  the  men  and  the  interest  of  the  officer  are  one 
and  the  same.  The  regard  and  solicitude  the  officer  has  for 
the  comfort,  the  welfare,  and  the  contentment  of  his  men,  is 
so  invariable  and  commonplace,  as  seldom  to  be  remarked 
among  military  men.  Is  it  likely,  then,  that  the  ofificerwill  need- 
lessly harass  his  men  by  Courts-Martial  and  punishments  if  he 
can  possibly,  and  for  the  best  interest  of  all,  avoid  doing  so  ? 
In  every  organization,  almost  without  exception,  the  candidates 
for  Court  Martial  are  a  very  small  quota  of  the  whole.  Let  it  be 
emphasized  that  the  generality  of  soldiers  are  self-respecting, 
observant,  well  behaved,  worthy  members  of  their  immediate 
community — most  suitable  servants  and  defenders  of  their 
country. 

Touching  the  attitude  of  ofificers  towards  the  really  few  offend- 
ers against  discipline — it  is  one  of  patience  and  repeated  condon- 
ation.     But  how  little  of  the  truth  of  this — to  which   the   experi- 


14 

ence  of  every  officer  who  has  commanded  a  troop  or  company  is 
witness — is  to  be  gathered  from  the  missive  which  has  been 
brought  to  our  attention  !  A  further  sinister  meaning  is  contained 
in  the  exaggerated  statement  in  regard  to  desertion,  chargeable, 
as  it  were,  to  interior  mismanagement  of  the  Army.  There  is 
the  familiar  saying  that  water  will  not  rise  higher  than  its  source. 
The  country-at-large  is  the  source  of  the  Army.  The  estimation 
in  which  the  crime  of  desertion  is  held  by  the  country-at-large 
is  the  undoubted  explanation,  to  a  large  degree,  of  the  desertions. 
It  is  outside  of  the  Army  that  missionary  work  upon  that  subject 
is  needed.  Why  deserters  are  harbored  and  without  reason 
sympathized  with,  among  civilians,  ought  to  be  an  interesting 
and  fruitful  topic  for  the  consideration  of  "studious"  and 
"  speculative  "  writers. 

'J'his  is  one  of  the  peculiarities  of  human  nature  which  will 
probably  never  be  eradicated,  and,  it  has  a  leaning  to  the  side 
of  virtue  when  the  exemplification  consists  in  a  generous  man 
befriending  a  fugitive  from  military  slavery,  as  depicted  by  some 
public  writers.  A  cardinal  principle,  to  be  sure,  of  the  American 
people,  is  that  their  land  shall  evermore  be  the  asylum  of  the 
oppressed.  But  here  is  a  case  in  which  the  truth  has  been  abused 
without  mercy  and  for  the  time  being,  at  least,  is  seeking  a  refuge 
in  the  Army  !  Dummies  cannot  hit  the  mark  except  by  accident, 
of  course.  Here  the  tendency  has  been  to  over-shoot.  He  says 
that  ten  per  cent,  of  the  Army  deserts  yearly.  The  cannoneer  has 
taken  very  coarse  sight  and  somewhere  about  double  proper  ele- 
vation. And  the  same  as  respects  his  statement  that  the  Army 
costs  the  people  yearly  forty-eight  millions,  one  half  of  which  sum 
is  about  the  correct  figure.  Is  it  that  McCrackan  regards 
24,000,000  dollars  a  trifle  by  which  he  would  willingly  have  one 
of  his  mistakes  weighed  and  measured  !  If,  in  this  dissertation, 
it  be  a  fact  that  the  defining  and  the  consideration  of  "Our 
Military  Fever"  has  found  a  small  place,  the  same  fact  is  to  be 
noticed  in  the  article  to  which  our  observations  have  been  ad- 
dressed. 

That  writer  upon  "  Social  and  economic  questions  "  injects  the 
words,  "  our  military  fever,"  once  into  his  composition  and  then 
proceeds  to  give  the  Army  Hail  Columbia  !  Does  a  fusilade  upon 
the  regular  Army  demonstrate  military  fever  anywhere  ?  How 
bravely,  with  pen  in  hand,  has   he  been  able,  after  all,  to  elbow 


15 

his  way  through  his  fever-stricken  crowd,  without  taking  the  con- 
tagion !  But  let  us  try  to  define  his  subject,  from  his  own  stand- 
point. What  would  he  have  us  understand  by  the  term,  "Our 
Military  Fever?"  Does  he  not  mean  it  to  be  inferred  that  the 
American  people  have  displayed  a  temporary,  exaggerated,  unde- 
sirable, unnatural,  over-appreciation  of  the  profession  of  arms  ? 
Upon  its  face,  is  not  that  the  meaning  of  the  phrase  ?  Un- 
questionably, the  attention  of  its  author  was  drawn  to  the  dis- 
turbance, of  national  dimensions,  occurring  in  the  summer  of 
1894,  and  for  the  quieting  of  which  the  strong  arm  of  the  military 
was  absolutely  indispensable.  The  effective  use  of  the  military 
was  a  gratification  to  the  law-abiding,  a  decided  setback  to  law- 
breakers, and  a  revelation  to  both  classes  that  the  government 
had  such  a  prop  in  the  regular  army.  The  fever  was  not  a  mili- 
tary fever.  The  remedy  for  a  disease  should  not  be  confounded 
with  the  disease  itself.  The  medicine  that  cures  does  not  aptly 
describe  a  fever,  except  as  a  contrasting  term.  The  military 
ardor  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  rises  whenever  there  is 
occasion  for  it,  and,  as  illustrative  of  its  quick  abatement,  behold 
the  press  and  the  legislators  of  the  land,  in  the  main,  concurring 
that  the  military  establishment,  invaluable  as  it  has  proved  itself, 
shall  remain  in  statu  quo.  It  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that  an 
effort  to  reduce  the  army,  in  spite  of  the  events  of  1894,  would 
stand  a  good  prospect  of  success. 

Surely,    the  symptoms   of  military  fever  are  conspicuous  by 
their  absence. 

As  a  military  power  upon  this  hemisphere,  the  United  States 
stands  first. 

As  a  military  power  upon  the  continent  of  which  it  forms  a 
part,  our  country  is  irresistible. 

Take  away  the  sinews  of  war  of  this  country,  and  what  would 
be  its  classification  ? 

D.   C.   Pearson, 
Captain,  2d  Cavalry. 
Fort  Wingate,  N.  M.,  March  21,  1895. 


